This paper interconnects the diachronic development of two academies at geographical antipodes: the University of Auckland, Aotearoa New Zealand, and the Politecnico di Torino, Italy, in sharing the apparent contradiction between the words “urban” and “campus” at the crossroads of urban design, modern architectural tradition and historic urban landscape, critically tied with contemporary debates. Offering readings of selected sites for each campus that encapsulate socio- economic developments, urban and architectural morphologies, and cultural landscapes’ international reputations, the paper draws from a hybrid methodological approach that combines the global guidelines of the UNESCO Historic Urban Landscape approach, focused on the preservation of the layers of heritage in the urban context, to the urban planning reading of programmes and achievements of the modern age in complex integration of urban history and academic physical spaces. In particular, it explores the contribution and influences of architects, urban planners, heritage conservation experts, decision-makers and community representatives within such developments. The ultimate goal is to bring together historical and spatial inquiry towards a critical practice. On the one hand, it reveals a stimulating counter-history of a model university campus that is the site of cross-cultural exchanges rather than a colonisation template to be easily exported or imported. On the other hand, two antipodal university centres with endemic divergences – but comparable international appeal – appear as key representatives of the urban dimension and history of their hosting cities with clear projects, shaping strategies according to opportunities, limits and contingencies.
本文将新西兰奥克兰大学(University of Auckland)和意大利都灵理工大学(Politecnico di Torino)这两所地理位置相对的大学的历时性发展联系起来，在城市设计、现代建筑传统和历史城市景观的十字路口分享“城市”和“校园”这两个词之间的明显矛盾，并与当代的争论密切相关。本文采用了一种混合的方法方法，结合了联合国教科文组织历史城市景观方法的全球指导方针，重点关注城市环境中遗产的保护，为每个校园提供了包含社会经济发展、城市和建筑形态以及文化景观国际声誉的选定地点的阅读材料。在城市历史和学术物理空间的复杂整合中，阅读现代城市规划的方案和成就。它特别探讨了建筑师、城市规划师、遗产保护专家、决策者和社区代表在这些发展中的贡献和影响。最终目标是将历史和空间探究结合在一起，进行批判性实践。一方面，它揭示了一种令人兴奋的反历史模式，即大学校园是跨文化交流的场所，而不是容易输出或输入的殖民模板。另一方面，两个相对的大学中心具有地方性差异，但具有可比性的国际吸引力，它们作为城市维度和主办城市历史的重要代表，具有明确的项目，根据机会、限制和偶然情况制定战略。
{"title":"The Shape of Knowledge: University Campuses as Historic Urban Landscapes through Experiences of the University of Auckland and Politecnico di Torino","authors":"Candida Rolla, M. Moro, Monica Naretto","doi":"10.55939/a5039pw5a8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5039pw5a8","url":null,"abstract":"This paper interconnects the diachronic development of two academies at geographical antipodes: the University of Auckland, Aotearoa New Zealand, and the Politecnico di Torino, Italy, in sharing the apparent contradiction between the words “urban” and “campus” at the crossroads of urban design, modern architectural tradition and historic urban landscape, critically tied with contemporary debates.\u0000Offering readings of selected sites for each campus that encapsulate socio- economic developments, urban and architectural morphologies, and cultural landscapes’ international reputations, the paper draws from a hybrid methodological approach that combines the global guidelines of the UNESCO Historic Urban Landscape approach, focused on the preservation of the layers of heritage in the urban context, to the urban planning reading of programmes and achievements of the modern age in complex integration of urban history and academic physical spaces. In particular, it explores the contribution and influences of architects, urban planners, heritage conservation experts, decision-makers and community representatives within such developments.\u0000The ultimate goal is to bring together historical and spatial inquiry towards a critical practice. On the one hand, it reveals a stimulating counter-history of a model university campus that is the site of cross-cultural exchanges rather than a colonisation template to be easily exported or imported. On the other hand, two antipodal university centres with endemic divergences – but comparable international appeal – appear as key representatives of the urban dimension and history of their hosting cities with clear projects, shaping strategies according to opportunities, limits and contingencies.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124364358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Karl Langer (1903-1969), architect, town planner, landscape architect and academic fled Austria for Australia, settling in Brisbane in 1939. Required to spend the Second World War as a draftsman with Queensland Railways Department and denied a planning position with the Brisbane City Council, Langer commenced private practice (1946-1969). His significant influence on Queensland’s built environment is now belatedly being recognised and has resulted in the recent publication of Karl Langer: Modern Architect and Migrant in the Australian Tropics. This paper explores Langer’s contribution to the establishment of the heritage movement, as an early member of the National Trust of Queensland. Like many of his contemporaries, in Australia and overseas, he was both a modernist and a conservationist. Langer joined the Trust in 1964, its first year of operation, and was deeply involved when it acquired its first property in 1965. The property Wolston House is an 1852 stone farmhouse on the suburban fringes of Brisbane. He gave architectural advice on the physical condition of the building and prepared landscape plans for the grounds. He was a member of the restoration and appeal committees and prepared the artwork for the fundraising brochure. Before the term ‘adaptive reuse’ had currency, Langer advised the Trust on converting the 1870s bedroom annex into a caretaker’s residence and coffee shop. The annex was unceremoniously demolished, but Langer, the sophisticated European modernist, was at the heart of an early debate about conservation. Langer represented Queensland on the Australian Council of National Trusts committee which deliberated on classifications and criteria by which the heritage value of buildings would be determined. He contributed to the establishment of the early lists of historic Queensland buildings and wrote a paper on the conservation of landscape in urban areas. Langer’s unexpected death in 1969 meant that his influence on the nascent heritage movement in Queensland was foundational but is largely forgotten or misinterpreted. His legacy remains in his surviving buildings, eight of which are now heritage listed.
{"title":"Modernist and Heritage Conservationist: Karl Langer’s Contribution to the Heritage Movement in Queensland","authors":"F. Gardiner","doi":"10.55939/a5020pep5t","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5020pep5t","url":null,"abstract":"Karl Langer (1903-1969), architect, town planner, landscape architect and academic fled Austria for Australia, settling in Brisbane in 1939. Required to spend the Second World War as a draftsman with Queensland Railways Department and denied a planning position with the Brisbane City Council, Langer commenced private practice (1946-1969). His significant influence on Queensland’s built environment is now belatedly being recognised and has resulted in the recent publication of Karl Langer: Modern Architect and Migrant in the Australian Tropics.\u0000This paper explores Langer’s contribution to the establishment of the heritage movement, as an early member of the National Trust of Queensland. Like many of his contemporaries, in Australia and overseas, he was both a modernist and a conservationist. Langer joined the Trust in 1964, its first year of operation, and was deeply involved when it acquired its first property in 1965. The property Wolston House is an 1852 stone farmhouse on the suburban fringes of Brisbane. He gave architectural advice on the physical condition of the building and prepared landscape plans for the grounds. He was a member of the restoration and appeal committees and prepared the artwork for the fundraising brochure. Before the term ‘adaptive reuse’ had currency, Langer advised the Trust on converting the 1870s bedroom annex into a caretaker’s residence and coffee shop. The annex was unceremoniously demolished, but Langer, the sophisticated European modernist, was at the heart of an early debate about conservation. Langer represented Queensland on the Australian Council of National Trusts committee which deliberated on classifications and criteria by which the heritage value of buildings would be determined. He contributed to the establishment of the early lists of historic Queensland buildings and wrote a paper on the conservation of landscape in urban areas. Langer’s unexpected death in 1969 meant that his influence on the nascent heritage movement in Queensland was foundational but is largely forgotten or misinterpreted. His legacy remains in his surviving buildings, eight of which are now heritage listed.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127200892","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Despite the wealth of publications on Harry Seidler’s life and works, some aspects of the architect’s career remain relatively unknown or under-appreciated. This paper points the architect’s contribution to urban design through lesser-known high-rise projects designed for the inner city of Melbourne. The chronicle of Seidler’s jobs in Melbourne speaks more of an unsuccessful office unable to convert major prospects into realised outcomes than of the commercial projects and landmarks for which his work is widely acclaimed. Over 40 years, Seidler conceived several high- rise projects for Melbourne’s Central Business District, but apart from the notable exception of the heritage-listed Shell House, those projects remained unbuilt. At the core of Seidler’s scarce professional success in the second-largest Australian city, there was a problematic relationship that developed with local culture and city planning authorities. Seidler’s conflict with Melbourne erupted on the occasion of the planning approval of Shell House, surging in contrast to the rise of an overreaching and somewhat still pervasive post-modern urban design culture in the Victorian city.
{"title":"The Trouble with Harry: Seidler’s Tall Urban Design Legacy in Melbourne","authors":"G. Marfella","doi":"10.55939/a5032p0jt7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5032p0jt7","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the wealth of publications on Harry Seidler’s life and works, some aspects of the architect’s career remain relatively unknown or under-appreciated. This paper points the architect’s contribution to urban design through lesser-known high-rise projects designed for the inner city of Melbourne.\u0000The chronicle of Seidler’s jobs in Melbourne speaks more of an unsuccessful office unable to convert major prospects into realised outcomes than of the commercial projects and landmarks for which his work is widely acclaimed. Over 40 years, Seidler conceived several high- rise projects for Melbourne’s Central Business District, but apart from the notable exception of the heritage-listed Shell House, those projects remained unbuilt.\u0000At the core of Seidler’s scarce professional success in the second-largest Australian city, there was a problematic relationship that developed with local culture and city planning authorities. Seidler’s conflict with Melbourne erupted on the occasion of the planning approval of Shell House, surging in contrast to the rise of an overreaching and somewhat still pervasive post-modern urban design culture in the Victorian city.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124698720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper considers the stories (oral histories) of three Queensland women architects: Fiona Gardiner, Helen Wilson and Ruth Woods. Studying architecture in the 1970s and working in architecture from 1980 to the present, each story reveals new insights into the experiences of women architects in Queensland at a time when women were achieving parity in architectural education and greater representation within the profession. A focus of the paper will be the move made by each to the new and emerging discipline of heritage and conservation in Queensland in the 1980 and 1990s. Revealing new histories of the heritage movement in Queensland, it will be argued that the value of their stories also lies in the “benefits” they felt heritage work offered women architects practising in Queensland. These include the chance to establish sole practices (together with the flexibility this offered) and the opportunity to escape the traditional hierarchies of mainstream (private) practice.
本文考虑了三位昆士兰女建筑师的故事(口述历史):Fiona Gardiner, Helen Wilson和Ruth Woods。在20世纪70年代学习建筑，从1980年到现在从事建筑工作，每个故事都揭示了昆士兰女性建筑师的经历，当时女性在建筑教育和职业中获得了更多的代表。论文的一个重点将是每个人在20世纪80年代和90年代在昆士兰州对新兴的遗产和保护学科所做的举动。揭示昆士兰州遗产运动的新历史，他们的故事的价值也在于他们认为遗产工作为在昆士兰州执业的女性建筑师提供了“好处”。这些包括建立单独实践的机会(以及由此提供的灵活性)和逃避主流(私人)实践的传统等级制度的机会。
{"title":"Shifting Focus from Architecture to Heritage: Stories of Three Australian Women Architects","authors":"Cyndelle Kwabi","doi":"10.55939/a5029p4fpn","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5029p4fpn","url":null,"abstract":"This paper considers the stories (oral histories) of three Queensland women architects: Fiona Gardiner, Helen Wilson and Ruth Woods. Studying architecture in the 1970s and working in architecture from 1980 to the present, each story reveals new insights into the experiences of women architects in Queensland at a time when women were achieving parity in architectural education and greater representation within the profession. A focus of the paper will be the move made by each to the new and emerging discipline of heritage and conservation in Queensland in the 1980 and 1990s. Revealing new histories of the heritage movement in Queensland, it will be argued that the value of their stories also lies in the “benefits” they felt heritage work offered women architects practising in Queensland. These include the chance to establish sole practices (together with the flexibility this offered) and the opportunity to escape the traditional hierarchies of mainstream (private) practice.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121564348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The scale and ambition of the masterplan doesn’t fit neatly in either architecture or urban planning, and therefore, the history of master planning as a practice, its aesthetics and its ethics have long existed at the margins of both disciplines. In the postwar period, masterplan proposals designed by architects committed to high modernist ideals reimagined cities as orderly and aesthetic agglomerations – but with considerable anticipation of large-scale growth and development – both in the United States and abroad. As architects moved away from solely designing buildings to spearheading larger scale planning projects – straining their disciplinary expertise to the border of urban planning – an important transition took place. This shift might be best understood as a blend of omniscience and naivete, a stance that required architects to suspend specific knowledge to champion broad visionary pursuits. This paper considers an important aspect of everyday life: leisure time. Much touted by the tenets of high modernism, the ability to carve out time to “play” was largely a modern luxury, and this played out in a variety of projects worldwide, from beach resorts in Hawaii and ski resorts in France, to reimagined cities within cities, such as the masterplan for Century City, California in the Los Angeles Basin. Welton Becket’s 1963 urban vision called for the replacement of Hollywood studio lots with a composed entertainment, shopping and living centre focused on the needs of the Southern California entertainment industry. The ultimate buildout includes projects by a wide variety of late modernist architects, including Minoru Yamasaki, Charles Luckman and I. M. Pei, and it joins a long list of projects that champion leisure aesthetically expressed through architecture and planning schemes. Taken together, such projects underscore the increase in leisure, vacation time and conspicuous consumption that occurred after World War II and continues into the present day.
{"title":"Lights, Camera… Aluminum!: Materiality and Monumentality in Welton Becket’s Masterplan of Century City, CA","authors":"Joss Kiely","doi":"10.55939/a5052p8ncv","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5052p8ncv","url":null,"abstract":"The scale and ambition of the masterplan doesn’t fit neatly in either architecture or urban planning, and therefore, the history of master planning as a practice, its aesthetics and its ethics have long existed at the margins of both disciplines. In the postwar period, masterplan proposals designed by architects committed to high modernist ideals reimagined cities as orderly and aesthetic agglomerations – but with considerable anticipation of large-scale growth and development – both in the United States and abroad. As architects moved away from solely designing buildings to spearheading larger scale planning projects – straining their disciplinary expertise to the border of urban planning – an important transition took place. This shift might be best understood as a blend of omniscience and naivete, a stance that required architects to suspend specific knowledge to champion broad visionary pursuits.\u0000This paper considers an important aspect of everyday life: leisure time. Much touted by the tenets of high modernism, the ability to carve out time to “play” was largely a modern luxury, and this played out in a variety of projects worldwide, from beach resorts in Hawaii and ski resorts in France, to reimagined cities within cities, such as the masterplan for Century City, California in the Los Angeles Basin. Welton Becket’s 1963 urban vision called for the replacement of Hollywood studio lots with a composed entertainment, shopping and living centre focused on the needs of the Southern California entertainment industry. The ultimate buildout includes projects by a wide variety of late modernist architects, including Minoru Yamasaki, Charles Luckman and I. M. Pei, and it joins a long list of projects that champion leisure aesthetically expressed through architecture and planning schemes. Taken together, such projects underscore the increase in leisure, vacation time and conspicuous consumption that occurred after World War II and continues into the present day.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126378303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The book Community: Building Modern Australia (2010) is a key reference for understanding the programmes and initiatives aimed at enhancing community life within Australia across the twentieth century. It accounts for the relevant authorities and groups that were responsible for driving and supporting the creation of places for community use and enjoyment. One authority not mentioned in the book is the Joint Coal Board – a combined Federal and New South Wales State government-established body that was formed in February 1947 with powers to control the production and distribution of NSW coal. Tied to its powers was a directive to improve the health and welfare of mining communities in the Illawarra, Lithgow and Hunter regions. One branch of this was to financially support the construction of new community amenities in mining townships. This work began with a focus on the improvement of recreational grounds and facilities before moving onto housing and general community projects including baby health centres, ambulance stations, swimming pools and community halls. This paper describes the political background to the creation of the Board, its formation and membership, and the community amenities grant scheme it managed. It then focuses on the building projects the Board became involved with in the first ten years of its operation, including the £156,000 Cessnock Municipal Town Hall. The paper concludes by considering the reception of these buildings as symbols of civic achievement.
{"title":"Financing Civic Improvement: The Community Amenities Funding Scheme of the Joint Coal Board","authors":"P. Hogben","doi":"10.55939/a5023p0950","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5023p0950","url":null,"abstract":"The book Community: Building Modern Australia (2010) is a key reference for understanding the programmes and initiatives aimed at enhancing community life within Australia across the twentieth century. It accounts for the relevant authorities and groups that were responsible for driving and supporting the creation of places for community use and enjoyment. One authority not mentioned in the book is the Joint Coal Board – a combined Federal and New South Wales State government-established body that was formed in February 1947 with powers to control the production and distribution of NSW coal. Tied to its powers was a directive to improve the health and welfare of mining communities in the Illawarra, Lithgow and Hunter regions. One branch of this was to financially support the construction of new community amenities in mining townships. This work began with a focus on the improvement of recreational grounds and facilities before moving onto housing and general community projects including baby health centres, ambulance stations, swimming pools and community halls.\u0000This paper describes the political background to the creation of the Board, its formation and membership, and the community amenities grant scheme it managed. It then focuses on the building projects the Board became involved with in the first ten years of its operation, including the £156,000 Cessnock Municipal Town Hall. The paper concludes by considering the reception of these buildings as symbols of civic achievement.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132220445","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the early twentieth century the view of urban parks as health-giving, vital spaces in modern cities had been firmly established, however, a stark contrast was present in the position of small urban parks, funded and managed by municipal governments, and the state-funded, pseudo- scientific Botanic Gardens. Using Meanjin (Brisbane) as a case-study, this paper examines how conflict between local and state governments drastically hindered the construction of accessible and functional municipal parks, while simultaneously limiting the access of working-class and marginalised citizens to state government-funded spaces such as the Botanic Gardens. Lack of cooperation between the tiers of government, and the privileging of the Botanic Gardens as a site of middle-class leisure, also led to citizen-intervention and investment in council-run park space, which sought to exclude or limit the use of these spaces by those perceived to be ‘unrespectable’ members of the population. This paper asserts that the unequal and oppositional practices in the governing of park and reserve spaces in the early twentieth century, and the tensions between local and state authorities, led to a further entrenching of social demarcations in public park spaces, and negatively impacted upon the significance of park spaces in urban centres.
{"title":"Municipal Parks versus Glorious Gardens: The Tensions of Inter-Governmental Management of Urban Park Space","authors":"A. Temby","doi":"10.55939/a5048pbpg7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5048pbpg7","url":null,"abstract":"In the early twentieth century the view of urban parks as health-giving, vital spaces in modern cities had been firmly established, however, a stark contrast was present in the position of small urban parks, funded and managed by municipal governments, and the state-funded, pseudo- scientific Botanic Gardens. Using Meanjin (Brisbane) as a case-study, this paper examines how conflict between local and state governments drastically hindered the construction of accessible and functional municipal parks, while simultaneously limiting the access of working-class and marginalised citizens to state government-funded spaces such as the Botanic Gardens. Lack of cooperation between the tiers of government, and the privileging of the Botanic Gardens as a site of middle-class leisure, also led to citizen-intervention and investment in council-run park space, which sought to exclude or limit the use of these spaces by those perceived to be ‘unrespectable’ members of the population. This paper asserts that the unequal and oppositional practices in the governing of park and reserve spaces in the early twentieth century, and the tensions between local and state authorities, led to a further entrenching of social demarcations in public park spaces, and negatively impacted upon the significance of park spaces in urban centres.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131792057","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In India historic forts have been attracting the attention of Indian and Western scholars in recent times. National and international heritage institutions like ICOFORT-ICOMOS (International Scientific Committee on Fortifications and Military Heritage – International Council on Monuments and Sites), ASI (Archaeological Survey of India) and State Archaeology Departments are focusing on the study of these forts, aiming for their conservation. This paper presents a history and analysis of Vijaydurg Fort, one of the Maratha Sea forts of the Konkan region of Maharashtra, built along the coastline of Arabian Sea from 1657 to 1740 C.E. Vijaydurg Fort was an important naval station during the Maratha rule in order to administer the southern part of the Konkan coastline. This paper provides a brief review of the literature on Vijaydurg Fort, and an historical overview of it, and then focuses on a graphic record of the place that comprises maps from both the Maratha and British periods as well as drawings and paintings. The paper seeks to establish what this unique and significant graphic record contributes to an understanding of Vijaydurg Fort. Why was it located where it was, what factors affected its design and its evolution, and why did it maintain its importance over time despite change in the ruling dynasties? The paper shows that Vijaydurg Fort was strategically placed, given the cultural and maritime context, and that the design of the fort has evolved as per the requirements of each ruler and the activities carried out in and around it. Today the fort is accessed only from land, but the design and shape, including the proximity of gates and bastions to the inner built forms, convey its former maritime purpose. The fort was certainly placed at a strategic location using the natural features and it has evolved and undergone physical changes with the changing dynasties. The amendments mostly dealt with expansion and strengthening with smart defence mechanism aimed at safeguarding the trade and maritime activity of the region.
{"title":"Unfolding the Secrets of Vijaydurg Fort","authors":"Mugdha Kulkarni","doi":"10.55939/a5028p2dab","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5028p2dab","url":null,"abstract":"In India historic forts have been attracting the attention of Indian and Western scholars in recent times. National and international heritage institutions like ICOFORT-ICOMOS (International Scientific Committee on Fortifications and Military Heritage – International Council on Monuments and Sites), ASI (Archaeological Survey of India) and State Archaeology Departments are focusing on the study of these forts, aiming for their conservation.\u0000This paper presents a history and analysis of Vijaydurg Fort, one of the Maratha Sea forts of the Konkan region of Maharashtra, built along the coastline of Arabian Sea from 1657 to 1740 C.E. Vijaydurg Fort was an important naval station during the Maratha rule in order to administer the southern part of the Konkan coastline.\u0000This paper provides a brief review of the literature on Vijaydurg Fort, and an historical overview of it, and then focuses on a graphic record of the place that comprises maps from both the Maratha and British periods as well as drawings and paintings. The paper seeks to establish what this unique and significant graphic record contributes to an understanding of Vijaydurg Fort. Why was it located where it was, what factors affected its design and its evolution, and why did it maintain its importance over time despite change in the ruling dynasties?\u0000The paper shows that Vijaydurg Fort was strategically placed, given the cultural and maritime context, and that the design of the fort has evolved as per the requirements of each ruler and the activities carried out in and around it. Today the fort is accessed only from land, but the design and shape, including the proximity of gates and bastions to the inner built forms, convey its former maritime purpose. The fort was certainly placed at a strategic location using the natural features and it has evolved and undergone physical changes with the changing dynasties. The amendments mostly dealt with expansion and strengthening with smart defence mechanism aimed at safeguarding the trade and maritime activity of the region.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132159852","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The integration of urban sculptures into the urban planning system requires cross-disciplinary cooperation. Since 2003, many cities in China have mapped out all urban sculptures and formulated related regulations and overall urban plans. In fact, as early as 1982, the government established the Urban Sculpture Planning Group (USPG) to guide the development of urban sculptures. So why did it take so long to integrate urban sculptures into the urban planning system? Through analysing the changes in the USPG as well as related policies and regulations, this research shows that the development of urban sculpture planning in China has three critical moments: 1982 (origin), 1992 (transition) and 2003 (breakthrough). Also, the paper reveals that the changing ownership, responsibility and leadership of the USPG, the unclear definition of urban sculpture planning and many uncertain elements of urban planning are the primary factors slowing down the development of urban sculpture planning in China. The transition from urban sculpture to urban sculpture planning is not only a cross-disciplinary process but also a struggle between urban planning and sculpture. The paper argues that the essence of the transition is an antagonism between planning ideology under authoritarianism and the free expression of artistic thought. The research results benefit scholars in understanding the historical trends of urban sculpture practice in China. In addition, the history of urban sculpture planning reveals the problem of transition from small-scale objects to large-scale planning, which provides a prediction for the cross-field development of similar objects.
{"title":"Integrating Urban Sculptures into the Urban Planning System in China: Origin, Transition and Breakthrough, 1982-2003","authors":"Jie Zhu","doi":"10.55939/a5051pspxz","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5051pspxz","url":null,"abstract":"The integration of urban sculptures into the urban planning system requires cross-disciplinary cooperation. Since 2003, many cities in China have mapped out all urban sculptures and formulated related regulations and overall urban plans. In fact, as early as 1982, the government established the Urban Sculpture Planning Group (USPG) to guide the development of urban sculptures. So why did it take so long to integrate urban sculptures into the urban planning system? Through analysing the changes in the USPG as well as related policies and regulations, this research shows that the development of urban sculpture planning in China has three critical moments: 1982 (origin), 1992 (transition) and 2003 (breakthrough). Also, the paper reveals that the changing ownership, responsibility and leadership of the USPG, the unclear definition of urban sculpture planning and many uncertain elements of urban planning are the primary factors slowing down the development of urban sculpture planning in China. The transition from urban sculpture to urban sculpture planning is not only a cross-disciplinary process but also a struggle between urban planning and sculpture. The paper argues that the essence of the transition is an antagonism between planning ideology under authoritarianism and the free expression of artistic thought. The research results benefit scholars in understanding the historical trends of urban sculpture practice in China. In addition, the history of urban sculpture planning reveals the problem of transition from small-scale objects to large-scale planning, which provides a prediction for the cross-field development of similar objects.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127868582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Architects F. Noel Bamford (1881-1952) and A.P. Hector Pierce (1879-1918) both worked in Edwin Lutyens’ London office before establishing their Auckland partnership in 1907. Just prior to the formation of the partnership, Bamford designed a house called Ngahere in the Auckland suburb of Epsom. Ngahere is known as an early and important example of Arts and Crafts architecture in Aotearoa New Zealand. It is a novel application of the butterfly plan, with a dominant central section and two articulated wings. Although built in timber on a foundation of basalt, like some larger villas in surrounding Mount Eden, in its plan and form it was unlike any other house in Auckland. This paper explores the design of Ngahere considering Bamford’s knowledge and experience of Arts and Crafts architecture, including that gained during his time in Lutyens’ office. It asks whether this house is true to the ideals of the Arts and Crafts movement as conceived in England, using pre-industrial forms, traditional construction methods and hand-crafting, or shows evidence of other geographical paths of the Arts and Crafts movement such as the United States and Australia. Additionally, it asks whether aspects of the house relative to planning (including relationship to the site), built form, materials and detailing are reflected in later Bamford and Pierce houses, or more widely in Arts and Crafts houses in the Auckland region. The paper shows that while Bamford’s time in Lutyens’ office apparently provided him with a repertoire of design skills and ideas, it did not render him an acolyte. Rather, Ngahere included clear references to the broader architectural lineage and direction of the Arts and Crafts movement in England and beyond, apparent in the ways the house responds to its site and context, including the visual and physical relationships between indoor and outdoor spaces.
{"title":"Learning with Lutyens: Noel Bamford and the Design of Ngahere, Auckland (1907)","authors":"Anthony C. Barnes","doi":"10.55939/a5014ps6dt","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5014ps6dt","url":null,"abstract":"Architects F. Noel Bamford (1881-1952) and A.P. Hector Pierce (1879-1918) both worked in Edwin Lutyens’ London office before establishing their Auckland partnership in 1907. Just prior to the formation of the partnership, Bamford designed a house called Ngahere in the Auckland suburb of Epsom.\u0000Ngahere is known as an early and important example of Arts and Crafts architecture in Aotearoa New Zealand. It is a novel application of the butterfly plan, with a dominant central section and two articulated wings. Although built in timber on a foundation of basalt, like some larger villas in surrounding Mount Eden, in its plan and form it was unlike any other house in Auckland.\u0000This paper explores the design of Ngahere considering Bamford’s knowledge and experience of Arts and Crafts architecture, including that gained during his time in Lutyens’ office. It asks whether this house is true to the ideals of the Arts and Crafts movement as conceived in England, using pre-industrial forms, traditional construction methods and hand-crafting, or shows evidence of other geographical paths of the Arts and Crafts movement such as the United States and Australia. Additionally, it asks whether aspects of the house relative to planning (including relationship to the site), built form, materials and detailing are reflected in later Bamford and Pierce houses, or more widely in Arts and Crafts houses in the Auckland region.\u0000The paper shows that while Bamford’s time in Lutyens’ office apparently provided him with a repertoire of design skills and ideas, it did not render him an acolyte. Rather, Ngahere included clear references to the broader architectural lineage and direction of the Arts and Crafts movement in England and beyond, apparent in the ways the house responds to its site and context, including the visual and physical relationships between indoor and outdoor spaces.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126553108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：